If you're sure you don't want to work in the South I'd say go to BC. UT used to place fairly well in the northeast but ITE you want to be able to network and make connections as much as possible; if you go to BC you'll have a chance to network in the Boston area and hopefully make a connection for a job you'll actually want when you graduate.

its usually me comparing schools. I applied to 20 so I have a lot to compare. I honestly don't know if I want to go there. it's kind of like BC is the safe option and a UT or a UCLA pending an acceptance would be the adventure option. I'm not sure what will make me happier in the end.

imisscollege wrote:its usually me comparing schools. I applied to 20 so I have a lot to compare. I honestly don't know if I want to go there. it's kind of like BC is the safe option and a UT or a UCLA pending an acceptance would be the adventure option. I'm not sure what will make me happier in the end.

greatfool wrote:If you don't want to live in Texas (which is not the south either btw) , I'd say its probably not worth going to over BU, but probably is worth going to over BC.

This is strange advice. I was under the impression that BU and BC gave you comparable post grad prospects.

Fair enough, I don't know that much about either of them first hand, mostly just wanted to go on geography rant. I do think BU has a significant edge in national reach though of course local markets can behave in unpredictable (from the rankings) ways.

greatfool wrote:If you don't want to live in Texas (which is not the south either btw)

Please explain. Keep in mind, I'm aware of pretty much all of the nuances that might distinguish Texas from the other Southern states. However, that does not prove your point. If anything, Texas is THE Southern state established in the American conscience.

greatfool wrote:If you don't want to live in Texas (which is not the south either btw)

Please explain. Keep in mind, I'm aware of pretty much all of the nuances that might distinguish Texas from the other Southern states. However, that does not prove your point. If anything, Texas is THE Southern state established in the American conscience.

Texas is NOT in the South, and, in fact, UT places very few graduates in the South. Most of the 1/3 or so of the class that gets jobs outside of Texas end up in NYC, DC, or CA.

greatfool wrote:If you don't want to live in Texas (which is not the south either btw)

Please explain. Keep in mind, I'm aware of pretty much all of the nuances that might distinguish Texas from the other Southern states. However, that does not prove your point. If anything, Texas is THE Southern state established in the American conscience.

Texas is NOT in the South, and, in fact, UT places very few graduates in the South. Most of the 1/3 or so of the class that gets jobs outside of Texas end up in NYC, DC, or CA.

Texas is more or less its own region. Sure, East Texas has a traditional "Southern" vibe to it, but I doubt anyone would consider the Rio Grande area part of the South. Texas is just too big to classify as part of one major region, as certainly has more Western influences than a place like Mississippi. The culture in most of Texas is closer to that of the Southwest than that of the Deep South, from my experience.

eml256 wrote:Texas is more or less its own region. Sure, East Texas has a traditional "Southern" vibe to it, but I doubt anyone would consider the Rio Grande area part of the South. Texas is just too big to classify as part of one major region, as certainly has more Western influences than a place like Mississippi. The culture in most of Texas is closer to that of the Southwest than that of the Deep South, from my experience.

eml256 wrote:Texas is more or less its own region. Sure, East Texas has a traditional "Southern" vibe to it, but I doubt anyone would consider the Rio Grande area part of the South. Texas is just too big to classify as part of one major region, as certainly has more Western influences than a place like Mississippi. The culture in most of Texas is closer to that of the Southwest than that of the Deep South, from my experience.

What I mean by saying Texas is not the south is just that 1 that is has a very strong Spanish/Mexican influence. Much of the old south has little or no recognizably foreign influence. 2 those of us from the old south recognize Texas as much more culturally western. All along the east coast including much of the south there is respect for tradition, institutions, family lineage ect, and fairly strict class stratification (somewhat like England.) Western society has a much more open, permissive, frontier feel, if that makes sense.

Of course parts of East Texas as much more like the old South, and I can see that some of the things a Northerner would find objectionable about southern culture are common to both regions.

that being said, it has been debated on a lot of these threads whether or not texas ACTUALLY has a serious national reach or if it's just so highly rated cause it's very strong especially relative to to other options in a very large/significant region.

like if i didn't KNOW i wanted to work in Boston, would that justify my decision to go to TX if it's the best school I got into, just because of its supposed national reach?

OP ... Austin is not the worse place in the world, and Houston is a bit more happening than I think you realize. Having a great job there, thanks to a UT education, would not be a terrible outcome. Yes, the heat will kill you, but hey ... y'all freeze to death in the winter in Boston, so we're even.

But if you don't want to work in Texas, I'm not sure what UT is going to do for you. Yes, you could place OOS, but not as well as some other alternatives you might have.

Texas is not the south, it's it's own region/part of the southwest. The only reason people like to call it the south is because to people from areas like California and NYC the south is any area that is warm and isn't very liberal. To most people in these regions, any area that votes conservative or are not socially liberal are a part of the "south".

McNabb wrote:Texas is not the south, it's it's own region/part of the southwest. The only reason people like to call it the south is because to people from areas like California and NYC the south is any area that is warm and isn't very liberal. To most people in these regions, any area that votes conservative or are not socially liberal are a part of the "south".

I've lived in the legit Southwest and have been to Texas. We had rodeos as well in the SW, but during my visit to Texas, it seemed very different culturally. The SW has a good handful of Republican states too but I don't think people consider the SW "Southern" because of it. Granted I haven't lived in Texas, but I've moved around the country a bit, and I think the real SW has more in common with CA than Texas does with the SW. (side note, the SW and Texas are very different geographically. It's MUCH more humid in Texas than in the SW. I've never lost so much bodily fluids in an hour as I did in Texas. This was during the Spring, and the minute I stepped outside in TX my body went into "hot flash" mode. The SW gets hot, but I don't normally sweat because it's very dry.)